Government’s immigration reform makes good sense

In her column, “Fairness lost in immigration reform” (The Vancouver Sun, Wednesday, Jan 23, 2013), Antje Ellermann questions the fairness of the government’s decision to terminate the applications of 280,000 foreign skilled workers. While the decision was no doubt a major disappointment for those involved, it is important to take note of the circumstances in which it was taken.

The article failed to mention that previous governments had allowed a massive backlog of applications to build up (eventually swelling to more than one million) with no prospect of Canada being able to admit most of those caught up in it for years to come. To further complicate the situation, it was clear the standards under which most of them had qualified were quite inadequate in terms of ensuring they stood a good chance of being successful in the Canadian labour market. Indeed, many who had previously been accepted under these guidelines failed to find the employment they expected and, as a result of their weak economic performance, were estimated to be costing Canadian taxpayers around $20 billion a year.

Legislation passed in 2008 made it possible to give priority to applicants who met standards that made it far more likely that they would be able to find suitable employment when they arrived here. While those who had applied under the old guidelines were invited to reapply under the new, many chose not to — probably because they would not be able to meet the updated requirements.

What, then, are our obligations to those who had applied earlier but could not meet the new standards? In principle, someone whose application met the existing standards expected to be admitted within a reasonable period of time. This had clearly become impossible for many, however, because of the size of the backlog. In any event, there was nothing in the legislation that guaranteed someone who had applied and met the requirements would be issued a visa within a specified period of time.

In the circumstances, the government could have chosen to leave those who did not meet the new standards to languish indefinitely in the backlog and, by doing so, might well have avoided the legal challenges it is now facing. This, however, would have been no favour to such individuals since many might have kept their lives on hold in the hopes of eventually being admitted given that their applications were still pending. Ottawa instead took the decision to bite the bullet: It returned their application fees and told them to reapply if they still wanted to immigrate to Canada.

Nor did the government take this course of action without public discussion and consultation. Both House of Commons and Senate committees held extensive hearings on how to deal with the backlog. At these sessions, not only were government and opposition MPs able to question the immigration minister and his officials about the issues and how they could be dealt with, but the representatives of organizations that were apprehensive about changes to the system were able to register their concerns and hear the government’s explanations in detail.

The government has made major progress in terms of improving the immigration program and in addressing a range of problems that have been festering for years to the detriment of both newcomers and established Canadians. In the eyes of the Centre for Immigration Policy Reform, which I represent, a great deal still needs to be done. If we were to do a better job utilizing the skills of the people already in the country and provided more training and educational opportunities relevant to the needs of our economy, we could get by with far fewer immigrants and temporary foreign workers than we are now admitting. In the meantime, the government’s decision on how to reduce the backlog of skilled worker applications makes good sense.

Martin Collacott is a former Canadian ambassador in Asia and the Middle East and lives in Vancouver.

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.